Presentation on theme: "The Economics Of Road Investment John Hine ETWTR SE197."— Presentation transcript:
The Economics Of Road Investment John Hine ETWTR SE197
Questions and Decisions 1. Is the project justified ?- Are benefits greater than costs? Which is the best investment if we have a set of mutually exclusive alternatives? If funds are limited, how should different schemes be ranked? When should the road be built?
Questions and Decisions 2. Are complementary investments required? Should stage construction be used? What standards should be applied ?
Appraisal Framework All appraisals need a framework or model for: a) Forecasting changes b) Evaluating those changes
The Costs of Road Investment SE697 These include: Supervision Management Manpower Machinery Materials Land Environmental Mitigation (e.g. Resettlement)
Primary Effects 1. Reduced vehicle operating costs fuel and lubricants vehicle maintenance depreciation and interest overheads Reduced journey time drivers, passengers and goods
Primary Effects 2. Changes in road maintenance costs Changes in accident rates Increased travel Environmental effects Change in value of goods moved
Secondary Effects Changes in agricultural output Changes in services Changes in industrial output Changes in consumers behaviour Changes in land values
Coverage and Double Counting Any economic analysis should be designed to give maximum coverage of benefits. But we must avoid double counting. Do not add primary and secondary benefits (e.g changes in land values added to changes in transport costs) In a competitive economy the consumers’ surplus approach (used in HDM) should be adequate.
The Economic Comparison An economic analysis involves a comparison of “With” and “Without” cases. Traffic forecasts are made for BOTH scenarios - The analysis should not be based on “before and after”. An unrealistic “Without” case can give a false result. A range of “with investment” cases should be analysed to find the best solution. A minimum investment approach often gives the best economic results and should be tested.
Economic and Financial Prices SE897 The cost to the economy of road rehabilitation and maintenance may differ from the financial cost because of : taxes and duties shortage of foreign exchange under-employment The Government will usually be concerned with ECONOMIC costs. Contractors will usually be concerned with FINANCIAL costs.
Use of Economic Prices SE797 In an Economic Appraisal we use ECONOMIC (or SHADOW) prices NOT FINANCIAL prices Adjust financial prices as follows: Exclude all taxes and duties and subsidies Use the planning discount rate not the financial market rate If overvalued exchange rate then value imports and exports more highly Use the opportunity cost of labour Standard Conversion Factors are now widely used for road construction costs
Benefits From Road Investment Changes in transport costs occur because of : Lower road roughness Shorter trip distance Faster speeds Reduced chance of impassability Reduced traffickability problems Change in mode
Traffic Categories Normal traffic: Existing traffic and growth that would occur on the same road, with and without the investment Diverted traffic: Traffic diverted from another road to the project road as a result of the investment Generated traffic: New traffic induced by the investment
Benefits from Road Investment Transport cost savings for existing (or normal ) traffic = Traffic x Change in Transport Costs per km x distance Main changes in cost from: a) change in transport MODE b) reduced journey TIME c) reduced VOCs SE297
Generated Traffic Benefits Traffic induced by the road investment are traditionally valued at: Half the difference in transport costs Hence total generated transport cost benefits = Generated traffic volume x change in costs per km x distance x 1/2
Estimating Benefits Normal traffic benefits: trips N * d 1 * (VOC 1 - VOC 2 ) Diverted traffic benefits: trips D * ((d 1 * VOC 1 )-(d 2 *VOC 2 )) Generated traffic benefits: trips G * d 2 * (VOC 1 - VOC 2 )/2 d 1 = existing road length d 2 new road length VOC 1 = vehicle operating costs per km “without”investment VOC 2 = vehicle operating costs per km “with” investment VOC data relates to each road section and its condition at the time
The Consumers’ Surplus Approach The Consumers’ Surplus Approach Total Benefits = Cost C1 C2 SE497 Additional benefits from new traffic and production induced by new investment T1 T2 Traffic + Transport Cost Savings to existing traffic and normal growth
Development Benefits SE397 Development benefits arise from a combination of increased traffic and reduced transport costs. Benefits may also include : Increased agricultural production Increased service provision Increased industrial activity
Different Types of Benefit Normal traffic benefits = traffic x change in transport costs Development benefits - A function of (change in transport costs) 2 Social benefits - A function of population x change in transport costs
Consumer’s Surplus Approach: Advantages: Simple, cost based, traffic approach dependent on predicting changes in traffic Disadvantages: May not address critical factors promoting either rural development or social access
Producers Surplus Approach Advantages: Draws attention to changes in agricultural output (key economic activity in rural areas) Disadvantages: No reliable way of predicting response - impact studies give widely different answers –it could be based on agricultural supply price elasticities but this is almost never done; it requires very careful examination to use. –For most projects benefits are just invented !
Producers’ Surplus Price & Costs per unit Of output p2 Increased farmgate price p1 lower input costs O1 O2 Output
Indicies and Ranking Widely used for feeder road planning; there are many different approaches e.g. i) cost of improvement / population ii) estimated trips / cost Adavantages: Speed, simplicity, transparency, many factors can be incorporated Disadvantages: How do we value widely different factors ? (adding up apples and pears); weightings are not stable ; cannot easily address questions of road standards, timing etc, ; possible double counting
Community Priorities Community priorities now often form an important part of feeder road appraisal. It is possible just to ask communities to rank the investments they prefer- both within the road sector or between roads and other investments. Advantages: Community acceptability, use of community knowledge Disadvantages: Sectional interest groups may dominate voting, community knowledge of area or road impact may be poor
1. Net Present Value: NPV = (B 1 - C 1 ) + (B 2 - C 2 ) + ….. (B n - C n ) (1 + r) (1 + r) 2 (1 + r ) n 2. Internal Rate of Return : solve for i, (IRR) 0 = (B 1 - C 1 ) + (B 2 - C 2 ) + ….. (B n - C n ) (1 + i) (1 + i) 2 (1 + i ) n B 1, B 2 … B n : Benefits in years 1, 2 … n C 1 C 2 C n : Costs in years 1, 2 …. n r : Planning discount rate, n : planning time horizon
3. Net Present Value/ Investment Cost NPV/ C = NPV/C i 4. First Year Rate of Return FYRR = (B 1 - C 1 ) C i B 1, C 1 : Benefits and Costs in year 1. C i : Road investment costs
Economic Comparison of Alternatives When comparing project-alternatives, the Net Present Value (NPV) is used to select the optimal project-alternative (alternative with highest NPV) The Internal Rate of Return (IRR) or the B/C ratio are not recommended to compare alternatives of a given project Alternatives NPV 0.0 3.7 6.7 5.5 Optimal Alternative: Highest NPV Project
Ranking Projects by Economic Priority When comparing the economic priority of different projects, a recommended economic indicator is the NPV per Investment ratio Projects Selected Alternative Overlay Reseal Overlay NPV/Investment 8.4 5.2 2.1 PRIORITYPRIORITY
Economic Decision Criteria NPV IRR NPV/CFYRR Economic validity v. good v. good v. good poor Mutually exclusive v. good poor good# poor projects Project timing fair## poor poor good Project screening poor v. good good poor /robustness Use with budget fair ## poor v. good poor constraint # Need incremental analysis ## Needs continuous recalculations
Appraisals & Post Evaluations 1. An Appraisal is carried out before an investment is made. Everything is uncertain. A Post evaluation may be made say 5 years after the investment. The investment is known and 5yrs of with case are known. The without case is unknown as is the remainder of the with case.
Appraisals & Post Evaluations 2 In Both Cases forecasting and evaluation models are required to come to an answer. Hence we can never be certain about the viability of an investment !